On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 5:32 PM, Jason Remillard <[email protected]>wrote:
> Hi Ian, > > One more thing. I realize that this is a controversial area. On our > import MA building import we decided to not include the MassGIS > building id. The id was just a munged centroid position and MassGIS > indicated they don't intend for it to be preserved/maintained long > term. Basically, the shape file needed a primary key, so they made one > up. Unless the Chicago GIS people intend on preserving the id over the > long term (like the gnis id), I would not bother including it. If > somebody needs to match back to the original data set, they can just > sort it out using centroids. Including it has the cost of discouraging > non-expert mappers from improving the data. The Chicago data folks do intend on making that building ID useful (they want it to be a unique key for a building across many different city datasets), so I decided to keep it in the tagging conversion.
_______________________________________________ Imports mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/imports
